Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reliability and validity of the adapted Turkish version of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire

  • Case Series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ), scoliosis specific quality of life questionnaire, was developed to assess the spinal appearance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Turkish version of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (Tr-SAQ).

Methods

Tr-SAQ and already validated Turkish SRS-22 were applied to 75AIS patients (56 females) twice within a 2-week interval for test–retest reliability. Validity of the Tr-SAQ was assessed with factor analysis, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Convergent validity was evaluated by calculating Spearman correlation coefficients between Tr-SAQ and SRS-22 self-image domain. Internal consistency and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were evaluated for the determination of reliability.

Results

Factor analysis indicated that Tr-SAQ had two factors as appearance (items 1–10) and expectations (items 12–15). Convergent validity test showed a significant negative correlation between the Tr-SAQ appearance score and SRS-22 self-image score (Spearman’s r = − 0.6).Test–retest was conducted within a mean of 16.7 (range 14–28) days. Both ICC and Cronbach’s α were found to be high (0.98, 0. 91, respectively). The correlations with the major curve magnitude were stronger for the Tr-SAQ Appearance (r = 0.7) and Tr-SAQ Total (r = 0.6) scores than the correlations between the SRS-22 self-image (r = − 0.5) and SRS-22 Total (r =  − 0.4) scores.

Conclusion

The Turkish version of the SAQ was reliable and valid for clinical use for AIS patients who are native speakers of Turkish.

Level of evidence

Level I- diagnostic studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Herring JA (2002) Tachjian’s Pediatrik Orthopeadics, 3rd edn. New York, W.B, Saunders Company

    Google Scholar 

  2. Roach JW (1999) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Orthopedic Clin North Am 30(3):353–365

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Smith PL, Donaldson S, Hedden D, Alman B, Howard A, Stephens D, Wright JG (2006) Parents’ and patients’ perceptions of postoperative appearance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 31(20):2367–2374. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000240204.98960.dd

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Diab M, Polly DW, Diamond BE, Sucato DJ (2013) Discriminative properties of the spinal appearance questionnaire compared with the scoliosis research society-22 revised. Spine Deform 1(5):328–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2013.06.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Asher M, Min Lai S, Burton D, Manna B (2003) The reliability and concurrent validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 28(1):63–69. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.Brs.0000047634.95839.67

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Parent EC, Hill D, Mahood J, Moreau M, Raso J, Lou E (2009) Discriminative and predictive validity of the scoliosis research society-22 questionnaire in management and curve-severity subgroups of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 34(22):2450–2457. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181af28bf

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Parent EC, Wong D, Hill D, Mahood J, Moreau M, Raso VJ, Lou E (2010) The association between scoliosis research society-22 scores and scoliosis severity changes at a clinically relevant threshold. Spine 35(3):315–322. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cabe75

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanders JO, Harrast JJ, Kuklo TR, Polly DW, Bridwell KH, Diab M, Dormans JP, Drummond DS, Emans JB, Johnston CE 2nd, Lenke LG, McCarthy RE, Newton PO, Richards BS, Sucato DJ (2007) The spinal appearance questionnaire: results of reliability, validity, and responsiveness testing in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 32(24):2719–2722. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815a5959

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Guo J, Lau AH, Chau J, Ng BK, Lee KM, Qiu Y, Cheng JC, Lam TP (2016) A validation study on the traditional Chinese version of Spinal Appearance Questionnaire for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Euro Spine J Off Pub Res Soc 25(10):3186–3193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4590-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee JS, Shin JK, Goh TS, Son SM, An SJ (2017) Validation of the Korean version of the spinal appearance questionnaire. J Back Musculosk Rehabil 30(6):1203–1208. https://doi.org/10.3233/bmr-150480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Matamalas A, Bago J, D'Agata E, Pellise F (2014) Body image in idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison study of psychometric properties between four patient-reported outcome instruments. Health Q Life Outcomes 12:81. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-12-81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Misterska E, Glowacki M, Harasymczuk J (2011) Assessment of spinal appearance in female patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated operatively. Med Sci Monitor Internat Med J Expe Clin Res 17(7):404–410

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rosendo MGdA, Rangel TAdM, Pereira AFF, Ferreira MAC, Medeiros RCd, Cabral LTB (2016) Cultural adaptation and validation for portuguese of the spinal appearance questionnaire. Coluna/Columna 15(3):171–174. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1808-185120161503163067

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Roy-Beaudry M, Beausejour M, Joncas J, Forcier M, Bekhiche S, Labelle H, Grimard G, Parent S (2011) Validation and clinical relevance of a French-Canadian version of the spinal appearance questionnaire in adolescent patients. Spine 36(9):746–751. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e040e7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Simony A, Carreon LY, Hansen KH, Andersen MO (2016) Reliability and validity testing of a danish translated version of spinal appearance questionnaire (SAQ) v 11. Spine Deform 4(2):94–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.08.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wei X, Zhu X, Bai Y, Wu D, Chen J, Wang C, Chen Z, Yang C, Li J, Li M (2012) Development of the simplified Chinese version of the Spinal appearance questionnaire: cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric properties evaluation. Spine 37(17):1497–1504. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182407e25

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25(24):3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Alanay A, Cil A, Berk H, Acaroglu RE, Yazici M, Akcali O, Kosay C, Genc Y, Surat A (2005) Reliability and validity of adapted Turkish version of scoliosis research society-22 (SRS-22) questionnaire. Spine 30(21):2464–2468. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000184366.71761.84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Polly DW, Sucato DJ, Parent S, Roy-Beaudry M, Hopkins J, McClung A, Bratcher KR, Diamond BE (2011) Spinal appearance questionnaire: factor analysis, scoring, reliability, and validity testing. Spine 36(18):E1240–1244. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318204f987

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 107(2):238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Campbell DT, Fiske DW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull 56(2):81–105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60(1):34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cheung KM, Senkoylu A, Alanay A, Genc Y, Lau S, Luk KD (2007) Reliability and concurrent validity of the adapted Chinese version of scoliosis research society-22 (SRS-22) questionnaire. Spine 32(10):1141–1145. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000261562.48888.e3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Niemeyer T, Schubert C, Halm HF, Herberts T, Leichtle C, Gesicki M (2009) Validity and reliability of an adapted German version of scoliosis research society-22 questionnaire. Spine 34(8):818–821. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819b33be

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Simony A, Carreon LY, Andersen MO (2016) Reliability and validity testing of a danish translated version of the scoliosis research society instrument-22 revised (SRS-22R). Spine Deform 4(1):16–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.06.006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

There is no financial funding in the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Ankara Oncology Education and Training Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Aliekber Yapar

  2. Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

    Dilek Yapar

  3. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Corum Sungurlu State Hospital, Corum, Turkey

    Yilmaz Ergisi

  4. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Dr Sami Ulus Maternity, Children’s Health and Diseases Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Ahmet Yigit Kaptan

  5. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Dr. Nafiz Körez Sincan State Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Mehmet Ali Tokgoz

  6. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Mevlana Blv, 06560, Yenimahalle, Ankara, Turkey

    Alpaslan Senkoylu

Authors
  1. Aliekber Yapar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dilek Yapar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yilmaz Ergisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ahmet Yigit Kaptan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mehmet Ali Tokgoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Alpaslan Senkoylu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AY Study design, performed measurements and manuscript preparation; DY Study design, statistical analysis and manuscript preparation; YE Acquisition of data, interpretation of data and manuscript preparation; AYK Study design and performed measurements; MAT Performed measurements and interpretation of data; AS Study design, critical review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alpaslan Senkoylu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by Gazi University Ethics Committee. (Document number 625), The Manuscript submitted does not contain information about medical device(s)/drug(s).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from the participants and their families.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yapar, A., Yapar, D., Ergisi, Y. et al. Reliability and validity of the adapted Turkish version of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire. Spine Deform 9, 57–66 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00193-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00193-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation